Im new to LISP routines and Visual Basic

Im new to programming and work with ACAD all the time. I would like to improve my work by making it faster and better by using LISP routines or Visual Basic. Which is better? How can I learn more about both? What books do you suggest? I would like to understand better what is written in the discussion groups.
Thank you for all your help

 

Im new to programming and work with ACAD all the time. I would like to
improve my work by making it faster and better by using LISP routines or
Visual Basic. Which is better? How can I learn more about both? What
books do you suggest? I would like to understand better what is written in
the discussion groups.

Old question, search this NG for extensive past discussions on exactly the
same question.

They are different, as a pocketknife is different from a chainsaw. Neither
one eliminates the need for the other. They aren't interchangeable. Some
might claim that the (VB) chainsaw is more powerful, but it's a lot easier
and more reasonable to do an everyday chore like sharpening a pencil or
opening a box with the (lisp) pocketknife. Personally, I have a lot more
frequent and varied uses for a pocketknife than for a chainsaw. But when you
actually need a chainsaw, there's no substitute.

Which is better depends on what you need. Sooner or later you may need both.
Anyone who tells you that only one is in all cases superior in all ways is a
"true believer" (fanatic) who ought to be taken with at least a grain of
salt.

 

gatordea -

Welcome to the discussion groups. As Tom suggested, a search of
the past topics will bring up a lot of material to review.

The discussion group search engine provides flexibility for
searching through existing message content. To search:

1. Go to http://discussion.autodesk.com/

2. Select a product (Example: AutoCAD and then to Customization).

3. Type your keywords into the search box and click Search. I
used "tutorial" without the "" and got 126 past discussions on
that subject. You might want to read through those while waiting
to see if one of your peers answers directly.

Note: You can further refine your query by selecting a specific
discussion group from the dropdown provided. Your group choices
will vary in the drop down, based on where you have navigated on
the discussion group site.

Search results are sorted by relevance (a complex query of all
relevant content based on your keywords and group choices).
Clicking on the message result will display the entire thread
(the series of messages and replies). Clicking on the Post date
will sort the results by date with most recent first.

 

Re: AutoLISP vs. VBA
"They are different, as a pocketknife is different from a chainsaw. Neither one eliminates the need for the other. They aren't interchangeable. Some might claim that the (VB) chainsaw is more powerful, but it's a lot easier and more reasonable to do an everyday chore like sharpening a pencil or opening a box with the (lisp) pocketknife. Personally, I have a lot more frequent and varied uses for a pocketknife than for a chainsaw. But when you actually need a chainsaw, there's no substitute."

Poetry! pure Poetry!

I'm so glad you wrote this, this is exactly how I feel on the matter, and it is a perfect analagy (sp?)

Now I know the perfect reply, for when someone asks me, which is better.

Thank you.

 

They are different, as a pocketknife is different from a chainsaw.

That's why I NEVER play with chainsaws . . ..

;-)

jb

 

Hi,

And why I only use the pocketknife to clean the teeth of the chainsaw.

--


Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au

 

You must make a big mess when you open an envelope.

 

Hi Luis,

Not hard.
The hardest item for lisp programmers will probably be that, in general, you
should define variable before using them and assign a data type to the
variable, and that you can't set a variable to be one data type and then
later in the code change it to something else.

ie You can't do:
x = 3
x = "Fred"
whereas in lisp
(setq x 3) (setq x "Fred") is perfectly viable (whether it is sensible is
another argument).
Both Lisp and VBA are programming languages with variable assignment,
function calls, decision code and looping code.

An approach I have used is to clipboard the lisp code to VBA.

First work through the code for "(setq variable Something)" and replace
with
variable = Something, being careful that "Something" is a value and not a
call to a function such as:
"(setq variable (Something Parameter))"
in which case you would end up with
variable = Something (Parameter)

Arithmetic like things
(+ 1 2) become 1 + 2


(if (test)
(progn
( something1)
( something2)
)
(elsesomething)
)

becomes
If test
something1
something2
else
somethingelse
End if

The equivalent of Lists are Collections, but in many cases arrays will be
used as they are a much earlier implementation and users will be far more
familiar with them.
etc.
As the editor highlights code with incorrect syntax, it is easy to identify
the bits you haven't fixed.

As I have no experience of VLAX, I have no idea what it's code does and
can't add principles for transforming VLAX code.

Having said all that, it is often easier to create the program from a flow
chart of what you expect the program to do.
--


Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au

 

you know, I sure miss the cond statement of lisp when in VB. Select case only deals with values, not different tests to
perform in order.
I also have problems with and statements in VB, if I say:
if var1 = 2 and oAlignment is nothing then....

it does not behave how expected.
I might have rephrased the pocketknife/chainsaw comment by saying...
"two women are better than one"... <g>

"Laurie Comerford" <>
|>Hi Luis,
|>
|>Not hard.
|>The hardest item for lisp programmers will probably be that, in general, you
|>should define variable before using them and assign a data type to the
|>variable, and that you can't set a variable to be one data type and then
|>later in the code change it to something else.
|>
|>ie You can't do:
|> x = 3
|> x = "Fred"
|>whereas in lisp
|>(setq x 3) (setq x "Fred") is perfectly viable (whether it is sensible is
|>another argument).
|>Both Lisp and VBA are programming languages with variable assignment,
|>function calls, decision code and looping code.
|>
|>An approach I have used is to clipboard the lisp code to VBA.
|>
|>First work through the code for "(setq variable Something)" and replace
|>with
|>variable = Something, being careful that "Something" is a value and not a
|>call to a function such as:
|>"(setq variable (Something Parameter))"
|>in which case you would end up with
|> variable = Something (Parameter)
|>
|>Arithmetic like things
|>(+ 1 2) become 1 + 2
|>
|>
|>(if (test)
|>(progn
|> ( something1)
|> ( something2)
|>)
|> (elsesomething)
|>)
|>
|>becomes
|>If test
|> something1
|> something2
|> else
|>somethingelse
|>End if
|>
|>The equivalent of Lists are Collections, but in many cases arrays will be
|>used as they are a much earlier implementation and users will be far more
|>familiar with them.
|>etc.
|>As the editor highlights code with incorrect syntax, it is easy to identify
|>the bits you haven't fixed.
|>
|>As I have no experience of VLAX, I have no idea what it's code does and
|>can't add principles for transforming VLAX code.
|>
|>Having said all that, it is often easier to create the program from a flow
|>chart of what you expect the program to do.

James Maeding
jmaeding at hunsaker dot com
Civil Engineer/Programmer

 

t does not behave how expected.
I might have rephrased the pocketknife/chainsaw comment by saying...
"two women are better than one"... <g>

Rock and roll....

 

i could not agree more
thanks everyone for all the help
I ordered two books from amazon about LISP and VB
I hope they help
THANKS!

 

Not hard.

Your first generalization could lead to an interesting programming challenge/shootout, which probably deserves a thread of its own. The languages are so different. I run a few lisps on startup that do things which I believe would be practically impossible to "translate" to BASIC on anything like a line by line basis.

Your second observation would come into play -- you'd have to look at the program's objective, and find a completely different way of achieving an equivalent result, and I'd bet that, if indeed it could be done, there wouldn't be the slightest resemblance in code/methodology/algorithm between the different language versions. And it might be arguable whether the basic version accomplished the same goal, or turned it into a different problem.

I've translated basic algorithms into lisp, before VB support existed, to get their functionality into Acad. But I think the reverse process could be more difficult -- I think it wouldn't be very hard at all to write a lisp that would be quite difficult to replicate in basic.

I'll post a "challenge" when I get a chance, it could lead to an interesting comparison.

 

Hi James,

I've had similar difficulties. I suspect you already know this, but just in
case, and for other's reference; you can wrap vb code in parentheses to make
it cooperate. For complex conditions, it helps you tell the program
whether, for example, you mean:
((var1 = 2) and oAlignment) is nothing... or
(var1 = 2) and (oAlignment is nothing)
I suspect the latter, but vb may not unless you make it explicit.
<myrant>Also seems that there would be a general member function...
Built-in I mean... That returns false, not an error if the member does not
exist.</myrant>
--
James Allen, EIT
Malicoat-Winslow Engineers, P.C.
Columbia, MO

only deals with values, not different tests to